Analysis Of Jack De Groot's Free Trade For The Poor

Submitted By Ruby-Lang
Words: 765
Pages: 4

The World Trade Organisation meeting to be held in Hong
Kong set to determine the future of the global trading system. The world’s trade ministers will be discussing free trade deals between countries concerning the import and export of raw materials and produce. Often it is farmers in developing countries who are left at a significant disadvantage, as they are unable to advocate for their own livelihoods, which in effect leaves millions of farmers and their dependents living in dire poverty. Jack De Groot, in his opinion piece, ‘Free Trade is not
Fair Trade for the Poor’ (The Age, 14/12/05) presents in a determined manner that unlike farmer in developed countries, farmers in developing countries are not provided with government subsidies intended to protect their own industries and thus their quality of life is often very poor. De Groot who is the chairman of the
‘Make Poverty History (Australia)’ campaign presents a strong appeal to ethos, outlining why opening the free trade market to developing countries would further destabilise their economies.
De Groot criticises the global trading system several times to enforce his main contention. This increases awareness of poverty and exposes the inequitable trading system so that the reader feels encouraged to act. His use of exclusive language persuades the reader to shift their attention to the people held responsible, for example when he denounces that "rich countries have been manipulating international trade rules to protect their own interests". This should provoke an emotional response in the reader, realigning their beliefs with the task of erasing poverty.
Rich countries subsidising their own farmers, means that poorer countries can’t afford to grow crops because they need to sell their crops for such a small price. “These subsidies lead to massive over production… making it nearly impossible for exporters from poor countries to compete.” There is an inequality between developed and developing countries, which appeals to people emotions and morals. It leaves the reader feeling angry, but yet informed about the issue, and leaves them in a position to make a change. The people that need to sacrifice little for other countries well being, are developed countries, their government and their farmers; this will

allow developing countries and their farmers to live a better life, and support the people around themselves.
De Groot argues that developing countries must be allowed to retain some control over how fast and how far they open their markets. The phrase 'forcing developing countries to open their markets too quickly and too deeply can have devastating effects' demonstrates emotional appeal which makes the reader feel responsible and want to take action. Informing the reader of the consequences developing countries face 'putting millions out of work, increasing poverty'. De Groot uses exclusive language 'rich countries, including Australia, would have to stop trying to force developing countries to open up their markets' allowing the reader to realise support is needed. He pulls…